Missile Defense

I think this MD Forum has been going on by default. Having far outlived what little usefulness it may once have had.

The abuse has been clear for long, but I won't hold my breath on NYT doing anything anytime soon...

from the script of Casablanca http://6nescripts.free.fr/Casablanca.pdf p. 92

Rick comes quickly up to Renault. Rick: How can you close me up...

USA 1999 statistic - 1609 gun deaths in just the 18-19 age group http://www.tincher.to/deaths.htm

Raises the question -

Why does a 'bodybag' from war-related-death have such an impact on the American psyche as compared to a death in the gutter

NOTHING to do with MD ! As usual.

Just dragging whatever you find in the yard does NOT necessarily belong here on MD...

Raises the question -

Why does a 'bodybag' from war-related-death have such an impact on the American psyche as compared to a death in the gutter

Preference Ignore Cantabb

cont'd with overlap......

Cantabb objected to the illustration of multiple citation to these pieces. But I hope we agree that the pieces themselves are - focused - they do not "chase their tails." I think we have more to learn about how such focus comes into existence - and think we can learn more directly - proceeding along the lines of this thread...

I'm going on - there's not much to the last post, in my opinion.

IF it's your last post – then I agree !

I'm saying that going around in circles is essential to much human logic - and can convege - though it need not...

Here's a 'power' question The concept of 'Empire America'? Looking at the straight totalled number of voter in the 2000 election http://www.wittendal.com/usa1.htm it seems so many americans were simply 'out to lunch' on that day -- and/or had their franchaise to vote withdrawn eliminating them a say in their democratic representation ... in the land of 'Liberty' and 'Freedom' ...

We need common ground to agree or disagree clearly about anything much.

Which is why I keep asking you what is it that you think you (and your esteemed colleague, lchic) have been working on this forum for 2-plus years ? And what specifically do you think you have accomplished, in relation to the claims you have made...

The afore mentioned writer made the assertion (additional to Shakespeare being Captain of teams of teams) that 'Language is where we live' and that 'we live in a SWIRL of language'

Suggests:

the 'bi-lingual' enjoy dual residency; implies a need for acculuralisation to make 'outsiders' integral to the group; begs understanding and digestion of the language of an issue such as Missile Defense And yet, MD is a zone shunned and deflected by cultures generally - as indicated by: few songs stories plays films limited information regularly available to reader MD doesn't feature in general conversation the negative aspects (fallout) of defense are ignored the clean-ups of past war are NOT priority The swirl of language with respect to MD is patchy and limited, perhaps a flurry here and there - it's pushed aside rather than taken on board. Perhaps the human brain is protecting itself from overload.

Posts don't suddenly become relevant and on-topic, just because you include the words (Missile Defense) or the abbreviation (MD)...

AN INCOMPLETE EDUCATION by Judy Jones and William Wilson Ballantine Books, NY 1987

On the front dust jacket:

From Freud to Floating Currencies . ...

I'm saying that going around in circles is essential to much human logic - and can convege - though it need not. Cantabb is, in general, against the idea...

Could you restate your questions?

Could you read any of my several posts in which I repeated them? Did you miss them each time ?..

Could you restate your questions?

Lchic tells me that the board reads pretty well with your posts on "ignore" - and the fact is, your work hasn't been the only thing I've been concerned with...

No problem putting those three in the same sentence.

Good to know.

Thanks for your excellent recent posts, Cantab ...

Shakespeare lived before there was much math - but he'd have understood the connections to math needed here, I think. There are functions. …….and so on

- and though this may seem "circular" or "philosophically meaningless" - the fact is that "endless series" solutions involving these things (derivatives and derivatives of derivatives) are central to most of the key results of applied mathematics - and pure mathematics, too...

This passage is from Fundamental Neuroanatomy by Walle J. H. Nauta and Michael Feirtag ...

The connection to Shakespeare works well in another way. Shakespeare was a great human being - he produced a great corpus …… Now, the corpus of this thread is not distinguished in the ways Shakespeare's is - but it does have a serious purpose - and its word count is now several times greater than Shakespeare's (the thread text is now somewhere over 8 million words - and links to billions of words pretty directly. ) Enough so that it could be subjected to every kind of text analysis (including statistics) that is used on Shakespeare's text...

This begs the question - If Shakespeare were Commander-in-Chief today and acknowledged for his 'generousity of spirit towards humanity' - then: How would Tudor-Bill handle the 'Terrorist Question', Iraq, and Missile Defense.

More irrelevancies from you. Including just the words [“Missile Defense”] is NOT going to make it relevant...

rshow55 Tag-line: "Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES.

Better Question: Can YOU & lchic do that ?..

YAWN!

School yard mature, as usual.

Can't justify KAEP in the context of MD, as defined asnd clarified?..

No solution consistent with the "constraints" implied in the circumstances above is possible.

For human survival, we need solutions that people can "live with." ....

WE NEED A REFRAMING ...

YAWN!

More rambling 'in-denial' Schoolyard nonsense!

Back to parroting things, eh ?

Put my posts NEXT to rshow's and see if you can tell the difference !..

Suggestion for Cantabb

Go read the thread from post one. Read all posts.

Suggestion for you: SLOP doesn’t take long to figure out...

How long are you going to keep dodging the questions I asked ?

None of what you posted so far, numerous links included, serves as an ANSWER !

Cantabb , the intensity of your emotion interests me...

More rambling 'in-denial' Schoolyard nonsense!

YAWN!

Mission complete!..

RShow is over the edge. He is a bi-polar with multiple personality disorder...

Go read the thread from post one. Read all posts.

Catch you later ....

So nitpicking Rshow is constructive and an 'on Topic KAEP' is not?

ONCE AGAIN, asking him to tell us what he thinks he has been working on for 2+ years here and what has he really accomplished during this time, in relation to his global claims is NOT "nitpicking." That's the crux of the problem: something he has NOT yet been able to state coherently, other than 'world peace' and big fihts/little fight and his own tortured rationalizations. Much like your OWN in relation to your defense of the continuing 'abuse' of this Forum and of your object of admiration, rshow55...

Posts by Almarst are set out and posted separately at http://www.mrshowalter.net/PostsBy_Almarst.htm - a list of links which would take 130 pages to print.

Posts by Gisterme are set out and posted separately at http://www.mrshowalter.net/PostsBy_Gisterme.htm - which is a 32 page list of links...

You have already been making my point on your self-referencing, but you out-did yourself: about 150 self-referencingnks in 5 posts !

How obsessive !

THIS, instead of answering two simple questions I have been asking you in the past 2 weeks...

Ooops, Erratum:

Please delete (instead of knitting) and replace with (nitting) in the above post.

ASKING questions on what rshow55 and you have been doing ON-topic for this long is neither "knitting" nor "nitting": Apparently, embarrassingly uncomfortable for you and other regulars, still floundering around to answer two simple straightforward questions !

Try to find something constructive you can to do !

Preposterous Nonsense!

NOTHING original, is it ? Repeating what you were told and shown, and didn't like it much ?..

"Cabtabb,"

Another school yard move ?

I see your 'What nonsense' and raise that by a: Your assertions are Preposterous! and meant to conceal your failings and ignoble ambitions.

School yard dares ?..

I think "connecting the dots" and "loop tests" are useful. Not perfect, not complete in themselves, but still essential to human cognition...

fredmoore - 10:52am Oct 3, 2003 EST (# 14258 of 14261)

Still smartiung under, I see.

This mandate, logically speking, leaves the door open to a wide range of relevant multidisiplinary scientific approaches to DEFENSE.

“[M]andate” ?..

My approach makes sense of " basic principles of rational analysis" that have been dangerously incomplete all these years.

What ? Wonder how we managed so far [with ““ basic principles of rational analysis" that have been dangerously incomplete all these years.”]

One of the few basic things required in rational analysis: “facts” not personal opinions or fiction, or a convenient blend of them...

Cantabb, Try posting something on MD or KAEP as an MD alternative.

Have been asking the VERY same of the "regulars," including you ! And what have they been doing on-topic for the past 2-plus years?..

To sort things out well - you need both synthesis from associations - "connecting the dots" - and "going around and around, different ways - to establish internal and external consistency - loop tests.

and Cantabb calls that "nonsense."

Here's an analogy ( not exact in every way ) that deals with a lot of human experience.

Grinding is a partly statistical process - an abrasive geometry "goes round and round" to shape and polish another object...

Try posting something on MD or KAEP as an MD alternative. Don't you have anything constructive to bring to this forum?

PS Nice 'duck out' of your Dickens blunder...

"Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?..

Another 20+ links to your own posts: recycled confusion.

To sort things out well - you need both synthesis from associations - "connecting the dots" - and "going around and around, different ways - to establish internal and external consistency - loop tests. I'm citing an article from Blaine Harden that has influenced me - that I associate and link with other ideas - some my own - some external...

Cont'd....

- including some recent assistance, regarding perturbation and damping, from Cantabb .

ASKING you to tell us what you think you have been doing here on the Forum for 2+ years [working so 'hard] AND for substantiation of ther global claims you have been making : May be "perturbation and damping" for YOU -- because you seem UNable to focus or answer staightforward questions asked of you on your 'hard' work here for so long...

Whether I'm right or wrong about that - with some crossreferencing it would be possible to support the idea that I really believe that.

More “crossreferencing” for what, with what ? Btw, “the idea” (still undefined?) you talk about ?: Is it THAT new and original ?..

The failures of complex cooperation that people have most trouble with now - and the problems of peacemaking that we find insoluble now - involve complicated subject matter . I'm working to do a teaching job that I believe is necessary to deal with those problems. I think there's progress...

The failures of complex cooperation that people have most trouble with now - and the problems of peacemaking that we find insoluble now - involve complicated subject matter . I'm working to do a teaching job that I believe is necessary to deal with those problems. I think there's progress...

rshow55 - 07:34am Oct 2, 2003 EST (# 14216 of 14219)

85 Percent Of Public Believe Bush's Approval Rating Fell In Last Month ……….- and can guess that Onion folks think so, too - since they've made it available on the net again...

Enlighten US ! You have a Phd in Mme Defargerie no doubt? I guarantee everyone else will say she was knitting...

"Did you know what Madame LaFarge was said to have really done ? "

Enlighten US ! You have a Phd in Mme Defargerie no doubt?..

"Asking him to focus, make a reasoned argument, and substantiate what he claims: NOT positive ? You find this as my 'negative' "intent" ?"

cont'd with overlap ....

If you actually read my posts in context you would see that I try to steer Rshow into more rational and fruitful channels.

What I see is just the opposite...

Preposterous!

What else do you think I am, if NOT a forum reader/participant ? An NYT employee ?..

Preposterous!

What else do you think I am, if NOT a forum reader/participant ? An NYT employee ?..

"I’m a forum reader/participant like you – NOT responsible for keeping this forum open or closing it down."

Preposterous!

Responsibility is HARDLY the issue. The issue is one of intent and you have clearly expressed your intent to close this forum...

gisterme - 01:35am Oct 1, 2003 EST (# 14191 of 14205)

rshow55: "...At gisterme's suggestion, I posted this - and it seems to me that there was a certain amount of interest ..."

gisterme: I suggested no such thing. You simply made up that ridiculous baloney you claim I "suggested" you post. I knew noting about that tripe until you posted it...

Cantabb "Can't hear what you say - I've got beanz in my ears"

Preferences - Ignore

You don’t need to hear Cantabb. NOT required to.

You’re marching to a different drummer...

You remain confused.

If you [cantabb] can't close the forum down with your written complaints to NYT AND you cannot convince Rshow to post on topic ... what USE are you and what is the purpose of your continuance?..

About 5 self-references/links in one single post. Scattered and cliched, as usual; more nonsensical wanderings.

The following postings, though extensive, .......

The first sentence, my last post should read: "I think 'ignoring' them would NOT do it."

The solution is to place them, (including Alarmist and Rotteneggs)on the ignore posts.

I think 'ignoring' them would do it. Confronting and challenging them on specifics and rationality might, might (?) fare a little better...

Endless slop !

IN NEGOTIATION PROBLEMS - THE SAME ISSUES EXIST - AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE WORKABLE SIMULATIONS OF THE ACTORS WHO WISH TO HAVE A STABLE COOPERATION - WITHIN PREDICTABLE AND STABLE LIMITS.

Don’t you want to know WHAT EXACTLY are the issues, and prepare for them --- before the face-to-face ?..

Your unfocused rambling continues....

http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/483 includes some petty pictures - and dialog about them Fractal Images ............ Control systems out of adjustment oscillate uncontrollably or ..........

continued with overlap.......

"If you follow this board, it is easy to see that I couldn't do the things I propose in.......... "I'd be blocked - quite often on status grounds...

Here's a somewhat detailed response -- just to set the record straight:

Cantabb - please answer me this. I asked jorian319 a specific question just above - in 14128 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.RwB4bMwLLHC.585361@.f28e622/15834

Actually, in # 14128, you quote an exchange (from #13678) and ask 3 questions (clearly rhetorical: as Jorian says above) . Your circular self-referencing aside, the Questions you ask [roughly] : how long people have to “fight”, how many would “really want” to fight, and how many know how to avoid a “fight”?..

http://www.softsource.com/softsource/m_cndl.gif

http://www.softsource.com/softsource/m_pine.gif

http://www.softsource.com/softsource/m_pine.gif

http://www.softsource.com/softsource/m_trieye.gif

Control systems out of adjustment oscillate uncontrollably or diverge - like fractals - they do not close. But things can be adjusted so that order, symettry, and harmony for a purpose are attainable. People, of course, do this often - when they take care, and know enough to do so...

Was I saying something you already know?

Referred to

How often do people have to fight?..

Another raw gem from cantabb. I am rather enjoying his dissembly of Rshow's ramblings. Do you need someone to bring you food or anything, cantabb?..

Would you have a clear answer to the question asked ( not just another effort to generate divergence and another expression of hostility ).

When I suggested a very sensible way to solve some problems - or so it seemed to me - your response was an emphatic "you couldn't pay me (us) enough" - ( as I recall )...

Most people know lot more than what you're saying.

Another raw gem from cantabb. I am rather enjoying his dissembly of Rshow's ramblings...

If everybody actually knew those things when it mattered we'd sort out the problems that now stump us.

In fact, if YOU knew that, you would NOT add to the burden.

Was I saying something you already know?..

I suggest you take this over to OP-Ed Editorial Forums, section on Friedman. Note: THAT is a "moderated" forum.

His book [L&OT] has been discussed there and here and elsewhere lot of times...

Another series of mindless rote, gone over and over.

Disjointed, inherently flawed logic, based on ‘unvarified’ doesn’t metamorphose into something rational JUST by such senseless rote. “Checking” is NOT just word: involves rational process NOT seen here ...

There are many ways to skin an Rcat without jumping on its Rtail and ... many ways to Can a tabby without jumping on its head!

And there is always MORE re-tread from school yard Fred.

Cantabb hijacks Gis..termes sub

raises periscope glub glub

spies Rhsow in the distance

who needs help and assistance

"Rig for anti-NONSENSE running" bellows Cantabb from the conn

"Load tubes one and three we got him on the run",

"target locked" and "fire", the big fish on the wire

are moving to their target , things are looking dire

oops there's tragedy a looming but torpedos miss their quarry

"Due to Canonicity, your dots were not connected and I'm really very sorry".

FM2003

One more MD regular doing more of the same .......

- that isn't necessarily such a unrealistic objective ["...and save mankind thru the MD thread..."] - it depends on how much saving mankind needs - and how hard mankind is already working to save itself.

Gisterme , I think some of your postings have been directed to your effort to clarify things - as if you were in a position to make decisions that mattered to all or much of mankind. Intellectuals, after all, do a lot of as iffing ........

Cantabb: for the last 12 days.

. Gisterme: Since Mar, 2002 & before

...

If "non-contritubory to the header of above" is the standard you use to decide whom to ignore then I can understand how you'd use that device on rshow and cantabb. Neither of them are contributory to the header topic. Of course by fair application the same standard you'd have to ignore yourself too...

"...'Ignore' (see preferences button) can be used to take out monikers that are non-contributory to the header above in either the narrow or wider senses. It's a useful device - I'm employing it currently..."

If "non-contritubory to the header of above" is the standard you use to decide whom to ignore then I can understand how you'd use that device on rshow and cantabb. Neither of them are contributory to the header topic...

Rubber Maids By WILLIAM NORWICH ................... We have too many vulnerabilities, by thousands and millions of times, to defend against them all, unless we do so as part of a working world community.

Totally irrelevant, as XXX = Lunarchick = lchic should have reminded you: "....

'Ignore' (see preferences button) can be used to take out monikers that are non-contributory to the header above in either the narrow or wider senses. It's a useful device - I'm employing it currently.

Here it's AGAIN, the MD Forum Header:

"Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts...

Why and the hell would anyone want more proof of showalter's gibberish?

Do you not understand what the ignore poster option is for?

A p[ewrsonal choice...

cantabb:You're making it difficult for Robert to maintain his stranglehold on conversation around here. Shame on you!

Monologue is NOT “conversation.” However, some dedicated ‘regulars’ here don't think so...

During that house arrest - I feel that I've been able to clarify some key points - after the manner of http://www.mrshowalter.net/Similitude_ForceRatios_sjk.htm - - set out in part in 14054 ……My sense of priorities is reasonably clear….

Absolutely NOTHING to do with the Forum. Only your personal situation, according to you...

cont'd with overlap...

These are emails I sent - modified to delete names of CIA personnel. The unmodified emails are available to the NYT -… I made to a inquiry from Deutsche Bank Securities July of last year - when a question was asked that I believe was in response to a CIA officer...

Yet another tiresome repetition !

I see little here that really merits a response. Let me point out a few other things, however:

In your last 3 posts you’ve provided at least 12 links/references to your own posts...

You're making it difficult for Robert to maintain his stranglehold on conversation around here. Shame on you!

Here's a fact - a fact that isn't so important to know if explosive fighting without end is the objective - but a fact that is important to know if stable resolutions that pass reasonable tests of fairness are to be achieved...

rshow55 - 09:25pm Sep 27, 2003 EST (# 14072 of 14075)

Maybe I'm wrong - and cantabb is not a salaried NYT employee. But if he is - the NYT organization should be ashamed of him - and wonder what the human standards are that produce his responses...

The 'nytimes' is paying 'the moniker that can't be named's salary.

Hmmm. That explains alot...

Cantabb of(f) course reduces alphabet to dot-dash-dot morse

lchic - 09:11pm Sep 27, 2003 EST (# 14070 of 14072)

Paying him? or Playing him!?

lchic - 09:20pm Sep 27, 2003 EST (# 14071 of 14072)

It's interesting that morse signals were devised to improve communication - that's 'slow' communication, which was 'fast' at that time, and expensive - between human animals...

More nonsensical speculations. More of: If you can’t answer the question, start personally attacking the one asking questions !

Cantabb quotes me just above: cantabb says: "NOT a fact...

Times Reporter Who Resigned Leaves Long Trail of Deception http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/11/national/11PAPE.html

A staff reporter for The New York Times committed frequent acts of journalistic fraud while covering significant news events in recent months, an investigation by Times journalists has found.

Maybe I'm wrong - and cantabb is not a salaried NYT employee...

reduces alphabet

to

dot-dash-dot

morse

Here's a fact - a fact that isn't so important to know if explosive fighting without end is the objective - but a fact that is important to know if stable resolutions that pass reasonable tests of fairness are to be achieved.

cantabb says: "NOT a fact. Just a naïve platitude"

How would you check something like that?..

Cont'd with overlap....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And, if after 25,000 posts, this empty wandering rhetoric is the best you have to offer by way of explanation, you do nothing but further strengthen my initial assessment of your “work," ‘using’ NYT forums.

That's been based on the assumption - that some may think naive - that people can learn how to agree to disagree clearly, without fighting, comfortably, so that they can cooperate stably, safely, and productively. Knowing that wouldn't avoid all conflict - ….. are especially useful - though arguably not "orignial" - and lchic and I have tried to produce some...

continued with overlap....

Another major objective has been to try to work out and teach enough so that people could avoid mistakes and fights that now go on with monotonous and lethal regularity - and endanger the world. I've had other objectives, too - some set out in passages that I think are the more important the more "obvious" they are...

Another series of confused, irrelevant digressive posts ! Another set of highly strained rationalizations:

Here's something else obvious .

People know very well how to convert disagreements into escalatory fights...

That's been based on the assumption - that some may think naive - that people can learn how to agree to disagree clearly, without fighting, comfortably, so that they can cooperate stably, safely, and productively. Knowing that wouldn't avoid all conflict - but it would avoid a great deal - and help limit the rest. It seems to me that people are about ready to learn "how to agree to disagree without fighting." I also think that a good deal has condensed...

7177 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.RwB4bMwLLHC.585374@.f28e622/8700

I think this is a year where some lessons are going to have to be learned about stability and function of international systems, in terms of basic requirements of order , symmetry , and harmony - at the levels that make sense - and learned clearly and explicitly enough to produce systems that have these properties by design, not by chance.

The lessons are fairly easy, I believe, though not difficult to screw up. A problem is that perfect stability - and complete instability - are mirror images - and issues of balance and correct signs can be, in a plain sense, matters of life and death...

Dogged Engineer's Effort to Assess Shuttle Damage By JAMES GLANZ and JOHN SCHWARTZ http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/26/national/nationalspecial/26ENGI.html , which was the subject of a fine editorial today.

Chicken Littles and Ostriches at NASA http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/27/opinion/27SAT3.html

Rodney Rocha, an obscure engineer at NASA, tried repeatedly, and in vain, to warn shuttle managers of a potential catastrophe.

We're "wired up" so that, unless we learn some things - we'll continue to make lethal mistakes with monotonous regularity - and the world will remain much uglier than it would be if we could only learn how we go wrong - by "being nice" in the wrong place - when right answers are needed...

I think Steve would have approved of this thread - though he sometimes "raked me over the coals" after the manner of cantabb.

It's NOT the matter of approving/disapproving this thread. It's the question of your use of it, and its purpose...

Further, it goes to show:........

Really ? Which version did you get DownUnder ?

cantabb: "...Talking about YOU finding the Letterman jibe ?"

gisterme: Ahem,... you're the one who pointed it out.

I pointed that out re comment by another 'regular' [fredmoore] on his exchange with me on 'Science in the News'...

Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut. :-)

Talking about YOU finding the Letterman jibe ?

You mean your posting of the the David Letterman jive? Sure I saw it. Right there on the "Science in the News" forum...

Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut. :-)

"...Didn't you see the focused on-topic posts and the discussion ?..."

You mean your posting of the the David Letterman jive? Sure I saw it. Right there on the "Science in the News" forum...

"Why would I be "in denial" ?

What have you accomplished here or on any other web forum, cantabb? [emphasis added]

Didn't you see the focused on-topic posts and the discussion ?

Did you see posters getting "entertained" there ?..

As your own posts so amply demonstrate.

MY posts have been pointing out the slop, in case you didn't notice. Not participating in it, as the "regulars" like you have been, for some 14,000 posts (+ more before)...

"...Well, some like participating in slop..."

As your own posts so amply demonstrate.

Q: What have you accomplished here or on any other web forum, cantabb?

A: "...Nothing more than any other poster would want: a focused discussion..."

You haven't accomplished that here and don't seem to be making any attempt to contribute to focusing the discussion on anything except your own whining...

Of course I remember it. The reason it ended is because I got the sense that you had no clue what it was about. I haven't changed my mind about that yet...

"...You must NOT remember the exchange we've had !..."

Of course I remember it. The reason it ended is because I got the sense that you had no clue what it was about. I haven't changed my mind about that yet...

"08" should be "8" after WebX? The intended address is http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.RwB4bMwLLHC.585377@.f28e622/15727

Made no difference. More of the same...

CAMP DAVID, Md. (Reuters) - President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin opened talks on Friday expected to focus on postwar assistance to Iraq and concerns that Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapon...

Showalter an interesting set of posts re cooperative negotiation

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?08@13.RwB4bMwLLHC.585377@.f28e622/15727

That opens NYT 'Member center' !

and additionally the Sc list of opinion headers.

NO politics in other Science Opinion forums !?!

Take a closer look they are all politically loaded...

Cantabb - we disagree on some key things.

At least you got that right !

Maybe lchic and I have been like the mosquito in fredmoore's mosquito and the elephant joke...

Here was the CENTRAL thing Bridgman knew about calibrating and perfecting a measurement instrument...

For stable end games - stable agreements - people and groups have to be workably clear on these key questions...........

rshow55 - 03:40pm Sep 26, 2003 EST (# 14022 of 14024)

After stable "agreements to disagree" - there's time, and safety - for incremental agreements to form and focus. .........

Maybe lchic and I have been like the mosquito in fredmoore's mosquito and the elephant joke. Bush and Putin know that answer...

cantabb: "...Others are busy making my point..."

gisterme: Your point? Heh heh. Welcome to the bandwagon, cantabb...

Cantabb

'You' can mean 'thou'

'You' can mean 'any reader'

'You' can mean that person to whom one is interacting with in a particular post - where there is a contribution to the board

---

Hint : Rather than swimming in minutiae, contribute to the discussion!

IF the above [on 'you'] is NOT the 'minutiae', I don't know what else it would be.

Hint: I am just responding to the posts directed to me [since my very first posts here]...

Your point? Heh heh. Welcome to the bandwagon, cantabb...

'You' can mean 'thou'

'You' can mean 'any reader'

'You' can mean that person to whom one is interacting with in a particular post - where there is a contribution to the board

----

Hint : Rather than swimming in minutiae, contribute to the discussion!

Fighting is sometimes useful and sometimes not. The rule "never fight" is a good one - but there need to be exceptions that work. We need to know when it is useful or necessary to fight, when it isn't - know how to fight better - know how to avoid fights better - in specific cases - including specific cases that require switching...

rshow55 by-line: "Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread."

Can YOU ?..

Looking for your points and opinions on MD ..... waiting .... still waiting ...

People need to learn something that ought to ……..People need to learn ………..Though some wonderful teaching about human differences goes on in stories written by people who get published in the New York Times - though the lessons don't often get learned. http://www.mrshowalter.net/Killer_Bikes_for_Chuwit.htm

I need to do some condensing - and cantabb's comments, though I find them a little homicidal - are stimulating.

“People [desperately] need to learn” to come to the point and make it...

~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Some posters even 'bicker' here, on this board.

Yes, they DO. And, even point to others...

One point is simplex Multi-points are complex So you're sticking with the '1' point? Will you win with the '1' point? Which race do you think you're in?..

If this board had 5% science it 'fits' the American Standard!

And, it's supposed to be a "Science" forum. Go figger !..

Cantabb - I checked out Sept 17th and additionally the Sc list of opinion headers. NO politics in other Science Opinion forums !?! Take a closer look they are all politically loaded...

I say I say I say ....

You mean : "Neigh, neigh, neigh" !

That boy with the barnyard manners is about as sharp as a bowling ball...

Mind you I performed this all in one post!

Wow !

I like the way you 'performed' all this !..

We've worked through some necessary conditions to prosperity and international cooperation.

We're still missing just a few...

It is fair to ask "What have you been doing, and doing with lchic , since that posting?

I think the answer is "a lot" - work that I expect should be able to reduce the risk of agony and death from war a long way from where it has been - and make advances in science and economics possible - and if I'm wrong - there ought to be ways to check that are actually workable.

Absolutely ridiculous claims...

rshow55 - 05:58am Sep 25, 2003 EST (# 13946 of 13958)

I think this thread has made the world safer.

How ?..

cantabb, bluestar - Well, gents, they've intervened from time to time over the years. Both Showalter and Lunarchick have been banned before but were shortly allowed to resume with new monikers. Go figure...

"...Doesn’t look like the NYT Moderators have bothered to do that. YET !..."

Well, gents, they've intervened from time to time over the years. Both Showalter and Lunarchick have been banned before but were shortly allowed to resume with new monikers...

I've just looked in for a brief moment and it's good to you're still at it Rshow. Cantabb, Jorian, you really are the most boring people ... block Rshow if you don't want to read him or go somewhere else...

'What's fair' and 'what's cheating' don't seem to cover the realities. Perhaps, in ways that transmute to something tangible and something that really matters to juries and to those concerned with connecting dots in order to achieve symmetry outside of the kitchen sink,

Just as coherent as your friend !

the following story (retold) reaches the heart of the matter:

There was an ant in the jungle who fancied an elephant...

I started today at 13899 - and I'm proud of what I wrote at 13900- 13903 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.RwB4bMwLLHC.585386@.f28e622/15603 - - and I feel like resting now.

Good to know what you're proud of.

This thread is not an accident - and the fact that I'm posting here involves more than "wrongheadedness" on my part...

And that's what counts, right? They are our hosts, after all... ...

cantabb: ~20%? You are generous.

That was rshow's OWN estimate [# 13918], i.e., 80% of 25,000 posts would have been 'barred'...

Cantabb - I'm trying to keep my temper under control - have you thought about doing that? You may be the best editor in the world - but I think you're applying standards in wrong places, and wrong times.

Keeping your "temper under control" ?..

continued with overlap....

Cantabb: Working with the patterns of discourse ( or patterns of closing off discourse) that you advocate so indignantly - how are those key questions - that are vital for workable closure of negotiations ever to be resolved?

WHAT "patterns of discourse"?..

You keep trying to rationalize the way you have used this thread.

An interesting article. Play Fair: Your Life May Depend on It By NICHOLAS WADE: .......

I'll be rereading your criticism - but think you're bridling exactly in the places where the things that are most important are...

. Play Fair: Your Life May Depend on It By NICHOLAS WADE http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/21/weekinreview/21WADE.html

If my survival was in your hands - what would happen?

Cantabb , I think it is clear that if the monitors wanted to construe the pupose of this thread exactly according to the heading - or any of the headings this thread has carried since its beginning in May 2000 ( those headings are here: 756 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.RwB4bMwLLHC.585386@.f28e622/949 ) - about 80% of the 25000 posts that have gone onto this thread would have been barred...

When people "think about things" - and "talk things over" that "boring" process goes on and on and on and on . . ...

rshow55 - 12:43pm Sep 24, 2003 EST (# 13914 of 13915)

Wasteful, Incoherent, Nonsensical for one purpose may be Economic, Coherent, and Sensible from another.

But when there is ONE specified purpose, NOT difficult to see what's "wasteful, incoherent and nonsensical" for THAT purpose. And, the 'purpose' of this forum, as of others, is clearly stated...

When people "think about things" - and "talk things over" that "boring" process goes on and on and on and on . . ...

rshow55 - 12:43pm Sep 24, 2003 EST (# 13914 of 13915)

Wasteful, Incoherent, Nonsensical for one purpose may be Economic, Coherent, and Sensible from another.

But when there is ONE specified purpose, NOT difficult to see what's "wasteful, incoherent and nonsensical" for THAT purpose. And, the 'purpose' of this forum, as of others, is clearly stated...

People have to do some switching.

...

For example, quite a lot of this thread is quite specifically focused on missile defense - and a lot more isn't.

Is that cheating - is that unfair ?

You can argue that it is - and cantabb is doing so...

You keep confirming my "criticism" and comments. More here. Parts of your posts are quoted to show that...

Maybe the Mods. should take a look at this thread.....it's pretty appalling....worse than just a personality disorder...its too bad because MD is interesting.

Doesn’t look like the NYT Moderators have bothered to do that...

When interconnected systems - with intention - get large enough - they become multipurpose - they involve switching at single nodes - and specializations that differ from place to place .

For example, quite a lot of this thread is quite specifically focused on missile defense - and a lot more isn't...

Too bad the dots are NOT numbered. That would have helped some to get 'some' picture for the effort.

I responded in 13786:

Some dots are much better numbered than others - and for such reasons - we share about 100,000 definitions of words that we figured out for ourselves from a well marked context...

cantabb: Go easy on the Robert.

I have been.

It's sad that Robert is allowed this forum to pursue a similar task and surely the stars will be extinguished before Robert is extinguished...

Internal consistency counts for a lot.

Repeating the same thing [a generality, an error or a piece of misinformation] over and over is ALSO "consistency."

For the life of me, I thought there was new and focused stuff in those postings. I'll have to sleep on some things - to try to adjust to cantabb's point of view...

cantabb - we don't agree often - but this seems focused to me - and was an attempt on my part to write something basic.

NOTHING new or focused in the links you posted. This self-referencing is just another attempt to justify how you and your dedeicated friend have been using/abusing the NYT privilege...

rshowalter - 10:00pm Aug 11, 2003 BST (#1623 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1792

1624 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1793

Those postings start:

" I've been arguing for the need for a paradigm shift that is both intellectual and moral - and simple enough to explain and use.

"Including some simple exemplars that lchic and I have worked to focus - that might be usefully taught to four or five year olds...

Of course occasionally we pick up another loonie, but they tire.

BUT some keep re-surfacing, continually !

More of the same: totally irrelevant personal biographical stuff.

If only the things I've been trying to get across were commonplaces !

It is true that I'm trying to focus ideas worth becoming commonplaces - with great help from lchic - and the question arises - who has a right to try and do that?..

Cantabb's comment ["Too bad the dots are NOT numbered. That would have helped some to get 'some' picture for the effort."] is interesting. Some dots are much better numbered than others - and for such reasons - we share about 100,000 definitions of words that we figured out for ourselves from a well marked context...

I see the whole KAEP process being similar to building a parallel siding for an imminent train wreck. Far enough ahead of the disaster and the train so you can switch the train to the new track just as things are starting to look grim.

It's going to be a nail biter, but the alternative is allowing the crash to occur and starting civilisation all over again...

drawing dots as a cape around us, we each 'make ourselves up' as we dance along ... creating our own realities

That's what it looks like.

Too bad the dots are NOT numbered...

More of the same. NOT going to help.

We need to learn to be clearer, and more reasonable, about what cheating is - and what fairness is...

I posted a number of postings very specifically connected to missile defense. Did you look at them? ( See above...

Why the sudden (and passionate and hostile) interest?

I'll be rereading every one of your postings - but I can't help wondering why the recent yet passionate ( and hostile ) interest.

Asking you to focus "hostile" ?..

Why the sudden (and passionate and hostile) interest?

This was before your first posting - but I think for backgound - you might look at 13690 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Yh5gbFgdIFd.1528534@.f28e622/15383 and especially 13691-2 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Yh5gbFgdIFd.1528534@.f28e622/15384 - posted just a short time before your first posting...

More of the same !

I think that my "unfocused ramblings" are pretty focused.

And, therein lies most of the problem...

Cantabb http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Yh5gbFgdIFd.1528534@.f28e622/15535 , I really do hope to reply to you, if I can get around it - but it does seem clear that you and I disagree about what fairness is. What balance is. What matters in context...

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?1@13.Yh5gbFgdIFd.1528534@.f28e622/15545

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?1@13.Yh5gbFgdIFd.1528534@.f28e622/15546

Nothing mentioned or raised in these lengthy posts has anything to do with issues raised and discussed in my posts so far on this thread. Comments on my exchange with gisterme reflect nothing but misunderstanding and confusion.

“You [cantabb] say that it is cheating - that it is unfair to do that things necessary to do so”: ...

gisterme - (# 13806 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Yh5gbFgdIFd.1528534@.f28e622/15499 contains this:

There's probably no place you can go on the web, in the world, solar system, galaxy or universe where the participants have more experience in dealing with endless repetition. ...

More of the same !

I think that my "unfocused ramblings" are pretty focused.

And, therein lies most of the problem...

Cantabb http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.fZn3byAEH4r.1191706@.f28e622/15535 , I really do hope to reply to you, if I can get around it - but it does seem clear that you and I disagree about what fairness is. What balance is. What matters in context...

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?1@13.fZn3byAEH4r.1191706@.f28e622/15545

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?1@13.fZn3byAEH4r.1191706@.f28e622/15546

Nothing mentioned or raised in these lengthy posts has anything to do with issues raised and discussed in my posts so far on this thread. Comments on my exchange with gisterme reflect nothing but misunderstanding and confusion.

“You [cantabb] say that it is cheating - that it is unfair to do that things necessary to do so”: ...

gisterme - (# 13806 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.fZn3byAEH4r.1191706@.f28e622/15499 contains this:

There's probably no place you can go on the web, in the world, solar system, galaxy or universe where the participants have more experience in dealing with endless repetition. ...

jorian - "...I do not simply scroll past, because cantabb has been a vital contributor, with both commentary and links, to other discussions in the past..."

gisterme: I've read posts from him elsewhere where he seemed entirely reasonable too.

Thus begins arm-chair pshychoanalysis of yet another poster. Could identity speculations be far behind ?..

"...I do not simply scroll past, because cantabb has been a vital contributor, with both commentary and links, to other discussions in the past..."

I've read posts from him elsewhere where he seemed entirely reasonable too. What do you supposed happened to him?

jorian319 - 06:20pm Sep 20, 2003 EST (# 13814 of 13814)

Whatever.

Yeah, whatever !

Whether you care to read/scan/scroll by my posts here [or on other forums] is YOUR choice.

NOT a required reading, you know.

You can also "Ignore" (I thought you already had me on it)...

Holy crap.

Maybe NYT would be interested in setting up a forum entitled "The Conduct of Other Posters", and set cantabb up as the moderator. I, for one, don't like having to scan all of cantabb's posts looking for content other than commentary on other posters' behavior...

Maybe NYT would be interested in setting up a forum entitled "The Conduct of Other Posters", and set cantabb up as the moderator. I, for one, don't like having to scan all of cantabb's posts looking for content other than commentary on other posters' behavior...

continued with overlap....

Okay. I'll just ignore you from now on too unless you want to do something besides whine...

continued with overlap....

As to your comment that I “haven’t been around long enough on this forum to be making statements like that,” Once AGAIN, I’d have to say "...SO ? Is there a REQUIRED qualifying time limit ?..

Just one more time, this detailed, this specific .....

I see you responded to my specific comments. Quoting is one thing, but I know you say you don’t want me to belabor the point, but once again, it’d be nice IF you read them carefully too, before reacting...

STILL in the school yard ???

Cantabelle is a deceitful dolt who has come to this forum without any substance and with the express intent of closing the forum down.

"[D]eceitful dolt" ?..

cantabb: "...I don’t want to belabor the point,..."

gisterme: Then don't do it any more, cantabb.

I wouldn't have to do that anymore, IF you read carefully the exchanges you comment on ....

As I've said, I'm nobody's judge; still, I can't help but notice the mountains where there should be nothing but teeny tiny mole-hills...

cont'd with overlap....

"...Strange ?” That you would become so defensive so quickly, cantabb? Yes it is...

Let me restate: You haven't been around long enough on this forum.

SO ? Is there a REQUIRED qualifying time limit ?..

Then don't do it any more, cantabb.

As I've said, I'm nobody's judge; still, I can't help but notice the mountains where there should be nothing but teeny tiny mole-hills.

I'll ask again...

Please don't do that, cantabb. Survival here would be far more unpleasant without it. ;-)

Reminds me of an old joke: There was an ant in the jungle who fancied an elephant. So one day he climbed all the way up her back legs to take out his satisfaction on her. A Monkey in a nearby tree saw this and was disgusted, incensed and secretly very jealous...

I don’t want to belabor the point, but you have to start reading the exchanges more carefully. Otherwise, you’ll create more confusion and unnecessary problems, and waste time.

I read the exchange you linked to...

He's out of the kitchen sink and into the sky He'll peck you to death in the blink of an eye escaping the axe he comes here to spy equipped with the missiles of logic and lie but what he fails to comprehend and this I say as sure as a friend there are all kinds of missiles and all kinds of defence and this forum makes no distinction, makes no pretence the essence of MD is not in DC it's in our backyard and over our fence.

FM2003

You should have around when NYT had a Science Poetry Forum (may be you were).

He wasn't the one in the kitchen sink

May be he is in the sky

and will swoop down you before

you get out of the school yard

He's no spy, he's no fool

Since you can't make any distinction

between all kinds of missiles

and all kinds of defense,

no wonder you've turned into

a huge kitchen sink

a sink that stinks !..

Let me restate: You haven't been around long enough on this forum.

"...If it's been 'beat[en] to death long', why it's taken this long to put it in the ground. Why turn it into a personal kitchen sink before that ?..."

Ask somebody that knows, cantabb...

If you're asking rshow to focus on it, you might as well forget it.

I was hoping the 'regulars' would do that by themselves. With or without NYT intervention...

I read the exchange you linked to. It didn't looke to me like you, Volchin and Fred really didn't know what each other were talking about at least part of the time...and the topic was so fundamentally important (I'm being facetious)! However, I'm really nobody's judge...

You're right cantabelle.

Not out of School-yard yet ???

This is where posters go, when they want to post reams of gibberish...

You just haven't been around long enough, cantabb.

Too bad, you didn't know or notice, but I've been on NYT Forums long enough to know; just Did NOT post on MD forum. But I'm somewhat familiar with its course, as I mentioned before...

"...WHY NOT focus on it, then ? Instead of ......"

If you're asking rshow to focus on it, you might as well forget it.

Besides him the rest of us seem to be finding some focus...except for you.

You just haven't been around long enough, cantabb. There were 10,000+ posts that were deleted before the current 14,000 began. The topical debate has been "beat to death" long since...

jorian319 - 06:14pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13747 of 13747)

cantabb: I might start watching this Forum

Jorian: Is that a threat? :-)

Well, NOT even a promise ! Just "might" :)

Well, it is a public forum,

Yeah, but that doesn't mean it's there for ANY one to keep abusing it...

Wow What a selective, self-serving recall ! You think the entire exchange is NOT here to "check" ?

Let see :

People, people, Listen up!..

On public discussion and public decisions on defense matters: We don't do it openly NOW, and, I don't expect they will do it on MD. Lot of times we don't really know what we do already have. ALL for obvious security reasons !

...OTOH, there is a reason that such decisions are not made at the public level.

The lack of pressing need NOW may be one reason for lack of interest. BUT that doesn't mean one can turn the forum into a kitchen sink...

It may be possible, but we don't really have it, do we ? Do we need it? Do we need to spend more money on it, in view of other budgetary demands ?..

Listen up!

Some conflicts don't need a resolution .. just a clarification...

gisterme: ...the bottom line for me is not whether it's possible or not (I'm sure it is) but whether it's needed or not.

Jorian: Agreed. A smuggled or domestically assembled device would seem a much greater threat than one delivered (suicidally, by the country of origin) by missile...

That was a rhetorical question, cantabb. Didn't you read the rest of the post? ;-]

I did know that...

I've got to think you guys have a long track record with cantabb when you both and even bb seem to go ballistic immediately upon his arrival. Something's up.

Once again, do you know who personally attacked whom first?..

gisterme - 09:40pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13768 of 13771)

cantabb - "...IF you care to see the sequence of exchange, you'll realize that it was HE who started this cycle..."

gisterme: So what? Rise above it. Apply a little grace if you have it in you...

That was a rhetorical question, cantabb. Didn't you read the rest of the post? ;-]

Anyway, if a technological missile defense system is really to be discussed, the bottom line for me is not whether it's possible or not (I'm sure it is) but whether it's needed or not...

Thanks. As for the advice, you're probably right; but it would seem it's already too late. I think that horse is already a-wanderin'...

Then why not call this forum "Human Conflict Resolution"?

Even IF it were, do you think any 'human conflict' can ever be resolved by the rambling naivete seen here. OR, by old personal tales, conspiracy theories (poster identities etc) and the kitchen sink approach ?..

"...IF you care to see the sequence of exchange, you'll realize that it was HE who started this cycle..."

So what? Rise above it. Apply a little grace if you have it in you.

Cantabelle,

Welcome to the schoolyard, Having fun. I am.

The school yard is still YOURS ONLY...

fred and cantabb -

Boys, boys! If we're going to make a serious effort revive this forum, why not bury the hatchets and try starting anew?

Fred, you know I respect your opinion, even when I don't agree with it...

Saudis consider nuclear weapons

By Ewen MacAskill in London and Ian Traynor in Vienna September 19, 2003 ................................

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What do you think Robert?

Wow !

Boys, boys! If we're going to make a serious effort revive this forum, why not bury the hatchets and try starting anew?

Fred, you know I respect your opinion, even when I don't agree with it...

I'd love to see this forum get "back on topic". However with the huge volume of "stuff" that was posted by rshow and lchic that made it nearly impossible. When a casual contributer wanted to post something, it would be swept away by pages and pages of "rshow/lchic" before anybody else could see it to respond...

Agree.

Have been watching the forum for a long time. Never had time or interest in the inane ramblings about everything and anything, including the personal matters and dirty laundry...

"...Just review the posts since my first post here yesterday !..."

Not to mention the last couple of years. We actually did have some somewhat interesting discussions about missile defense for a while; but that's been a long time ago.

I agree with you that most of what's been said here doesn't even have anyting to do with human conflict per se...

When's showalter, due back?

Missing his posts already ?

Mine are going to be different & focused, IF you recall !

When's showalter, due back?

Missing his posts already ?

Mine are going to be different, IF you recall !

One of the markers of cantabelleism, is that he will take a meaningless post, and repost it , line by line, adding his commentary.

It IS for your benefit. Specific response to specific comments...

Back to juvenile, chat room, behavior ? A la DownUnder ?

Cantabelle is a chook that pecks and pecks ...

Well I usually call him cantadd, but I like cantabelle.

Back to juvenile, chat room things. Right ?..

Cantabelle,

ONCE AGAIN, it's Cantabb, fredmoore !

IF you're interested in a civilized exchange, that is. Don't try to reduce the exchange to such juvenile levels...

.... Missile Defence is much more than just technology.

We know that !..

I've no idea why NYT keeps this Forum. It's a mystery. However, Missile Defence is much more than just technology...

Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful?..

cantabb #13590, On his personal difficulties (Job & health), I have already expressed my sympathies, and sincerely ! But these have NOTHING to do with ME !

Then much, much bickering...

If the old theories are where the rules and political systems were devised - and they misfit the community they are supposed to provide for - then a re-think is important...

- - - - - - -

MAYdayPEACE : The world won't listen

May Day protesters are demanding an end to exploitation and military aggression http://www.guardian.co.uk/mayday/story/0,7369,707704,00.html